Inhibitory role of remifentanil in hepatic ischemia-reperfusion injury through activation of Fmol/Parkin signaling pathway: A study based on network pharmacology analysis and high-throughput sequencing.

BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to elucidate the critical molecular pathways underlying the protective effects of remifentanil against hepatic ischemia-reperfusion injury in rats. Our approach integrated network pharmacology analysis with high-throughput sequencing to achieve a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms involved. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS: The study utilized GSE24430 gene expression data from GEO to investigate remifentanil's impact on Hepatic Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury in rats. Weighted Correlation Network Analysis (WGCNA) was employed to pinpoint crucial genes and identify modules of co-expressed genes. Differential analysis with the "Limma" package revealed genes differentially expressed in IRI vs. control groups. PubChem and PharmMapper provided target genes affected by remifentanil. Protein-protein interaction networks were constructed via GeneCards and STRING. Functional analysis pinpointed core genes involved in remifentanil's IRI alleviation. IRI rat models were established, and hepatic injury indicators, liver structure via H&E staining, autophagosome counts via electron microscopy, and gene/protein expression via RT-qPCR and Western blot were assessed. High-throughput sequencing analyzed molecular pathways affected by varying remifentanil doses in IRI rats. RESULTS: In the study, we discovered four primary co-expression modules associated with hepatic IRI, and the grey module exhibited the highest correlation with hepatic IRI.A total of sixty-eight genes that were differentially expressed were found to have a connection with hepatic IRI.Network pharmacology analysis found that remifentanil may alleviate hepatic IRI through Fmol.found that the Fmol/Parkin signaling pathway may alleviate hepatic IRI via Additionally, the database autophagy. The established hepatic IRI rat models further confirmed the above findings. CONCLUSION: Our study established that remifentanil triggers the Fmol/Parkin signaling cascade, amplifying the expression levels of Fmol and Parkin. This process culminates in the activation of autophagy within hepatic cells, ultimately alleviating hepatic ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI).

Predicting the optimal concentration of remifentanil for skull pin fixation with hemodynamic and analgesia nociception index monitoring.

Inadequate antinociception during skull pin fixation may cause hemodynamic instability in intracranial surgery. The optimal concentration of remifentanil to provide adequate antinociception and stable hemodynamics during skull pin fixation under analgesia nociception index monitoring is unknown. This study is to assess the 90% effective concentration of remifentanil for skull pin fixation under hemodynamic and analgesia nociception index monitoring. Twenty-six patients were enrolled for intracranial surgery, anesthesia was induced and maintained under total intravenous anesthesia using target-controlled infusion for remifentanil and propofol under analgesia nociception index and bispectral index monitoring. Skull pin fixation was performed at different effect-site concentrations of remifentanil required for Dixon's up-and-down method with a step size of 0.5 ng/ml under bispectral index 40-60. Inadequate antinociception is defined when either ANI < 30 or > 20% in hemodynamic changes from baseline (e.g. heart rate > 100 beats/min, or blood pressure > 180/100 mmHg) and the effect-site concentration of remifentanil is considered as failure. It is considered success as ANI > 30 and < 20% hemodynamic changes from baseline simultaneously. Seven pairs of failure/success were used for probit analysis. The 90% effective concentration of remifentanil for skull pin fixation with adequate antinociception and hemodynamic stability was 4.7 ng/ml.

Haemodynamic effects of remifentanil during induction of general anaesthesia with propofol. A randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Remifentanil may have a dose-dependent haemodynamic effect during the induction of general anaesthesia combined with propofol. Our objective was to investigate whether systolic arterial blood pressure (SAP) was reduced to a greater extent when the remifentanil dose was increased. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, dose-controlled study was conducted at the Day Surgery Unit of Haugesund Hospital, Norway. Ninety-nine healthy women scheduled for gynaecological surgery were randomly allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive remifentanil induction with a low, medium or high dose corresponding to maximum effect-site concentrations (Ce) of 2, 4 and 8 ng/mL. The induction dose of propofol was 1.8 mg/kg, with a Ce of 2.9 µg/mL. Anaesthesia was induced using target-controlled infusion. After 150 s of sedation, a bolus of remifentanil and propofol was administered. Baseline was defined as 55-5 s before the bolus dose, and the total observation time was 450 s. We used beat-to-beat haemodynamic monitoring with LiDCOplus. The primary outcome variable was the maximum decrease in SAP within 5 min after bolus administration of remifentanil and propofol. Absolute and relative changes from baseline to minimal values and the area under the curve (AUC) were used as effect measures. Comparisons of groups were performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: Median remifentanil doses were 0.75, 1.5 and 3.0 µg/kg in the low-, medium- and high-dose groups, respectively. The absolute changes (mean ± standard deviation) in SAP in the low-, medium- and high-dose groups of remifentanil were -39 ± 9.6 versus -43 ± 9.1, and -41 ± 10 mmHg, respectively. No difference (95% confidence interval) in the absolute change in SAP was observed between the groups (ANOVA, p = .29); medium versus low dose 3.7 (-2.0, 9.4) mmHg, and high versus medium dose -2.2 (-8.0; 3.5) mmHg. The relative changes from baseline to minimum SAP values were -30% versus -32% versus -32% (p = .52). The between-group differences in the AUC were not statistically significant. Relative changes in heart rate (-20% vs. -21% vs. -21%), stroke volume (-19% vs. -16% vs. -16%), cardiac output (-32% vs. -32% vs. -32%), systemic vascular resistance (-24% vs. -27% vs. -28%), and AUC were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: This trial demonstrated major haemodynamic changes during the induction of anaesthesia with remifentanil and propofol. However, we did not observe any statistically significant differences between low, medium or high doses of remifentanil when using continuous invasive high-accuracy beat-to-beat monitoring.

Effect of fentanyl and remifentanil on neuron damage and oxidative stress during induction neurotoxicity.

Opioids can be used for medical and non-medical purposes. Chronic pain such as cancer, as well as the frequent use of such drugs in places such as operating rooms and intensive care units, and in non-medical areas like drug abuse the effects and side effects of these drugs need to be examined in more detail. For this purpose, the effects of fentanyl and remifentanil drugs on neuroinflammation, oxidative stress and cholinesterase metabolism were investigated. Neuron cells (CRL-10742) were used for the evaluation of the toxicity of fentanyl and remifentanil. MTT, PON1 activity and total thiol levels for its effect on oxidative stress, AChE and BChE activities for its effect on the cholinergic system, and TNF, IL-8 and IL-10 gene levels for its neuroinflammation effect were determined. The highest neurotoxic dose of fentanyl and remifentanil was determined as 10 µg/mL. It was observed that the rate of neuron cells in this dose has decreased by up to 61.80% and 56.89%, respectively. The IL-8 gene expression level in both opioids was down-regulated while IL 10 gene level was up-regulated in a dose-dependent manner compared to the control. In our results, the TNF gene expression level differs between the two opioids. In the fentanyl group, it was seen to be up-regulated in a dose-dependent manner compared to the control. Fentanyl and remifentanil showed an inhibitory effect against PON1, while remifentanil showed an increase in total thiol levels. PON1, BChE and total thiol activities showed similarity with MTT.

Effect of remifentanil on three effect-site concentrations of propofol and their relationship during electroencephalography at loss of response, at maximum alpha power, and at onset of burst suppression: a prospective randomized trial.

PURPOSE: The effect-site concentration (Ce) at loss of response (Ce-LOR) to propofol closely correlates both with Ce as electroencephalographic alpha power becomes highest (Ce-alpha) and with Ce at onset of burst suppression (BS) (Ce-OBS), when no opioids are administered. Co-administration of opioids dose-dependently decreases Ce-LOR. We investigated the influence of remifentanil on the relationship between these three Ces. METHODS: After receiving approval from our local ethical committee, with written informed consent, we enrolled 90 participants (ASA-PS I or II) who were scheduled for elective surgery. Participants were randomly assigned to three groups: constant remifentanil Ce 0 ng/ml (Remi_0); 1 ng/mL (Remi_1); and 2 ng/mL (Remi_2). We recorded both raw EEG and EEG-derived parameters on a computer. After reaching remifentanil equilibrium, we administered propofol using a target-controlled infusion pump such that propofol Ce increased to about 0.3 µg/mL/min. After determining Ce-LOR, we administered 0.6 mg/kg of rocuronium and started mask ventilation. The study protocol ended after observation of BS. RESULTS: Three participants were excluded. Ce-LOR in each group (Remi_0, Remi_1, Remi_2) was 2.00 ± 0.58 µg/mL, 1.43 ± 0.49 µg/mL, and 1.37 ± 0.42 µg/mL. Ce-alpha was 2.91 ± 0.63 µg/mL, 2.30 ± 0.41 µg/mL, and 2.12 ± 0.39 µg/mL. Ce-OBS was 3.80 ± 0.69 µg/mL, 3.25 ± 0.68 µg/mL, and 2.90 ± 0.57 µg/mL. In three other instances, Ce was decreased by remifentanil. Generalized linear model analysis revealed that remifentanil had no influence on the relationship between the three Ces. CONCLUSION: During propofol anesthesia, even low concentrations of remifentanil shifted concentration-related electroencephalographic changes.

Remifentanil improves left ventricular diastolic parameters in patients with impaired diastolic function: a prospective clinical study.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction has a significant impact on perioperative morbidity and mortality, and its incidence is high in elderly individuals. Anesthetic agents may impair diastolic function, which may increase the incidence of perioperative complications. The aim of this prospective, clinical, phase 4 study was to investigate the effects of remifentanil on left ventricle (LV) diastolic function in patients with diastolic dysfunction. The study was performed on 30 spontaneously breathing subjects (aged 60-80 years) with diastolic dysfunction. METHODS: Thirty patients (aged 60-80 years) with diastolic dysfunction scheduled for surgery were recruited between November 2019 and March 2023. Left ventricle function was evaluated once the intravenous remifentanil infusion reached a target-controlled concentration of 2 ng/ml with transthoracic echocardiography. Analysis of systolic function focused on left ventricular ejection fraction and mean mitral annular S velocity (Sm), whereas diastolic function focused on changes in transmitral peak flow (E), E/A, mitral septal and lateral e' waves, E/e' ratios and left atrial volume index following remifentanil infusion. RESULTS: Diastolic function measures of LV (mitral E/e', septal and lateral e' waves) statistically significantly improved (E/e' from 10.6 ± 2.9 cm.sn- 1 to 9.5 ± 2.2 cm.sn- 1; p = 0.006) following remifentanil infusion. Left atrial volume index decreased following remifentanil infusion without statistical significance (from 55 ± 14.4 ml.cm- 2 to 51.6 ± 13.3 ml.cm- 2; p = 0.1). Systolic function (ejection fraction and Sm) did not change following remifentanil infusion. CONCLUSIONS: Remifentanil improves left ventricular diastolic parameters in patients with preexisting diastolic dysfunction. Our study suggests that remifentanil at a plasma concentration of 2 ng.ml- 1 might be used safely in patients with left ventricular diastolic dysfunction.

The arousal effect of sugammadex reversal of neuromuscular blockade differs with anesthetic depth in propofol-remifentanil anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial.

Sugammadex reverses neuromuscular blockade by encapsulating steroidal neuromuscular blockers; therefore, it does not pharmacologically affect sedation levels. However, some clinicians avoid using it because of sudden unwanted acting out or patient arousal. Previous studies suggested sugammadex-induced awakening, but frontal muscle contraction after sugammadex administration compromised reliability of results obtained from EEG-based anesthesia depth monitoring tools like bispectral index (BIS). We hypothesized that sugammadex would affect patients' arousal depending on their baseline levels of sedation. We evaluated arousal signs after sugammadex administration with BIS between 25 - 35 and 45 - 55 under steady-state propofol-remifentanil anesthesia at the end of a surgery (n = 33 in each group). After sugammadex administration, twelve patients with a BIS of 45 - 55 showed clinical signs of awakening but none with a BIS of 25 - 35 (36.4% vs. 0%, P = 0.001). The distribution of the modified observer's assessment of alertness/sedation scale scores was also significantly different between the two groups (P < 0.001). Changes in the BIS were significantly greater in the BIS 45 - 55 than in the 25 - 35 group (median difference, 7; 95% CI 2 - 19, P = 0.002). Arousal after sugammadex was affected by patient sedation levels, and clinical signs of awakening appeared only in those with BIS 45 - 55. Unwanted arousal of the patient should be considered when using sugammadex under shallow anesthesia.Clinical trial registry number: Clinical Trial Registry of Korea ( https://cris.nih.go.kr ; Principal investigator: Jieae Kim; Registration number: KCT0006248; Date of first registration: 11/06/2021).

Efficacy of Isoflurane-Remifentanil versus Propofol-Remifentanil on Controlled Hypotension and Surgeon Satisfaction in Rhinoplasty: A Single-Blind Clinical Trial Study.

Background: Rhinoplasty is a complex but popular surgery in Iran. The main complications of the surgery are post-operative bleeding and nasal septal hematoma due to poor intra-operative controlled hypertension. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of isoflurane-remifentanil (I-R) versus propofol-remifentanil (P-R) to induce controlled hypotension and to assess surgeon satisfaction with each of these combinations during rhinoplasty. Methods: In 2020-2021, a single-blind clinical study was conducted on 98 patients aged 18-50 years undergoing rhinoplasty at Mother and Child Hospital (Shiraz, Iran). Patients were randomly divided into P-R (n=48) and I-R (n=50) groups. Changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and heart rate (HR) were assessed during surgery and in the recovery room. A questionnaire was used to evaluate the level of surgeon satisfaction. Data were analyzed using independent samples t test, Chi-square test, and repeated measures ANOVA with SPSS software. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Five minutes after anesthesia induction, the P-R combination had a greater effect on reducing SBP (P=0.010), DBP (P=0.007), MAP (P=0.003), and HR (P=0.026) than I-R. However, from the 40th minute to the end of surgery and after 30 minutes of recovery, the I-R combination had a slightly better effect on blood pressure reduction than P-R. There was no difference in surgeon satisfaction with either of the two drug combinations. Conclusion: Both P-R and I-R combinations are recommended to induce hypotension during rhinoplasty. However, I-R is more effective than P-R in inducing the desired controlled hypotension.

Hemodynamic effects of a low versus a high dose of propofol during induction of anesthesia. A randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Hypotension is common after anesthesia induction with propofol and is associated with increased morbidity. It is important to examine the effects of the proposed interventions to limit preventable hypotension, as suggested by the reduction in the dose of propofol. Our objective was to investigate whether a high dose of propofol is inferior to a low dose with respect to changes in systolic arterial blood pressure (SAP). METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, dose-controlled, non-inferiority study included 68 healthy women scheduled for gynecological surgery at the Day Surgery Unit, Haugesund Hospital, Norway. The patients were randomly allocated 1:1 to a low or high dose (1.4 mg/kg total body weight (TBW) versus 2.7 mg/kg TBW of propofol corresponding to maximal effect site concentrations (Ce) of 2.0 µg/mL versus 4.0 µg/mL. The dose of remifentanil was 1.9-2.0 µg/kg TBW, with maximal Ce of 5.0 ng/mL. The patients were observed for 450 s from the start of the infusions. The first 150 s was the sedation period, after which a bolus of propofol and remifentanil was administered. Baseline was defined as 55-5 s before the bolus doses. LiDCOplus was used for invasive beat-to-beat hemodynamic monitoring of changes in SAP, heart rate (HR), cardiac output (CO), stroke volume (SV), and systemic vascular resistance (SVR). A difference of 10 mmHg in the change in SAP was considered to be clinically important. RESULTS: The SAP change difference for low versus high dose was -2.9 mmHg (95% CI -9.0-3.1). The relative changes for low versus high dose were SAP -31% versus -36%, (p < .01); HR -24% versus -20%, (p = .09); SVR -20% versus -31%, (p < .001); SV -16% versus -20%, (p = .04); and CO -35% versus -32%, (p = .33). CONCLUSION: A high dose of propofol was not inferior to a low dose, and a reduction in the dose of propofol did not result in clinically important attenuation of major hemodynamic changes during induction in healthy women. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03861364, January 3, 2019.

Pharmacodynamic mechanism-based interaction model for the haemodynamic effects of remifentanil and propofol in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Propofol and remifentanil are frequently combined for the induction and maintenance of general anaesthesia. Both propofol and remifentanil cause vasodilation and potentially reduce arterial BP. We aimed to develop a mechanism-based model that characterises the haemodynamic interactions between remifentanil and propofol. METHODS: Data from two clinical trials in healthy volunteers were analysed using remifentanil-alone, propofol-alone, and combination groups. We evaluated remifentanil effects on haemodynamics using a previously developed mechanism-based haemodynamic model of propofol. The interaction between propofol and remifentanil was explored using the principles of the general pharmacodynamic interaction (GPDI) model. RESULTS: Remifentanil alone increased the dissipation rate of total peripheral resistance by 50% at 3.0 ng ml-1. Additionally, the dissipation rates of HR and stroke volume were attenuated by 4.8% and 4.9% per 1 ng ml-1 increase in remifentanil concentration, respectively. The maximal effect of propofol alone in decreasing the production rate of total peripheral resistance was 78%, which decreased to 32% when combined with remifentanil 4 ng ml-1. The effects of remifentanil on HR and stroke volume were attenuated by propofol with maximum decreases of 11.9% and 21.2%, respectively. Goodness-of-fit plots and prediction-corrected visual predictive check plots showed good predictive performance of the models. CONCLUSIONS: The structure of the previous mechanism-based haemodynamic model for propofol was able to describe the effects of remifentanil alone on haemodynamic variables. The GPDI model provided a good framework for characterising the pharmacodynamic interaction between remifentanil and propofol on haemodynamic properties. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02043938; NCT03143972.

Spinal microRNA-134-5p targets glutamate receptor ionotropic kainate 3 to modulate opioid induced hyperalgesia in mice.

Background: Fentanyl and its analogs are extensively used for pain relief. However, their paradoxically pronociceptive effects often lead to increased opioids consumption and risk of chronic pain. Compared to other synthetic opioids, remifentanil has been strongly linked to acute opioid hyperalgesia after exposure [remifentanil-induced hyperalgesia (RIH)]. The epigenetic regulation of microRNAs (miRNAs) on targeted mRNAs has emerged as an important pathogenesis in pain. The current research aimed at exploring the significance and contributions of miR-134-5p to the development of RIH. Methods: Both the antinociceptive and pronociceptive effects of two commonly used opioids were assessed, and miRNA expression profiles in the spinal dorsal horn (SDH) of mice acutely exposed to remifentanil and remifentanil equianalgesic dose (RED) sufentanil were screened. Next, the candidate miRNA level, cellular distribution, and function were examined by qPCR, fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and Argonaute-2 immunoprecipitation. Furthermore, bioinformatics analysis, luciferase assays, miRNA overexpression, behavioral tests, golgi staining, electron microscopy, whole-cell patch-clamp recording, and immunoblotting were employed to investigate the potential targets and mechanisms underlying RIH. Results: Remifentanil induced significant pronociceptive effects and a distinct miRNA-profile from sufentanil when compared to saline controls. Among top 30 differentially expressed miRNAs spectrum, spinal miR-134-5p was dramatically downregulated in RIH mice but remained comparative in mice subjected to sufentanil. Moreover, Glutamate Receptor Ionotropic Kainate 3 (Grik3) was a target of miR-134-5p. The overexpression of miR-134-5p attenuated the hyperalgesic phenotype, excessive dendritic spine remodeling, excitatory synaptic structural plasticity, and Kainate receptor-mediated miniature excitatory postsynaptic currents (mEPSCs) in SDH resulting from remifentanil exposure. Besides, intrathecal injection of selective KA-R antagonist was able to reverse the GRIK3 membrane trafficking and relieved RIH. Conclusion: The miR-134-5p contributes to remifentanil-induced pronociceptive features via directly targeting Grik3 to modulate dendritic spine morphology and synaptic plasticity in spinal neurons.

Distinct Profiles of Desensitization of µ-Opioid Receptors Caused by Remifentanil or Fentanyl: In Vitro Assay with Cells and Three-Dimensional Structural Analyses.

Remifentanil (REM) and fentanyl (FEN) are commonly used analgesics that act by activating a µ-opioid receptor (MOR). Although optimal concentrations of REM can be easily maintained during surgery, it is sometimes switched to FEN for optimal pain regulation. However, standards for this switching protocol remain unclear. Opioid anesthetic efficacy is decided in part by MOR desensitization; thus, in this study, we investigated the desensitization profiles of REM and FEN to MOR. The efficacy and potency during the 1st administration of REM or FEN in activating the MOR were almost equal. Similarly, in ß arrestin recruitment, which determines desensitization processes, they showed no significant differences. In contrast, the 2nd administration of FEN resulted in a stronger MOR desensitization potency than that of REM, whereas REM showed a higher internalization potency than FEN. These results suggest that different ß arrestin-mediated signaling caused by FEN or REM led to their distinct desensitization and internalization processes. Our three-dimensional analysis, with in silico binding of REM and FEN to MOR models, highlighted that REM and FEN bound to similar but distinct sites of MOR and led to distinct ß arrestin-mediated profiles, suggesting that distinct binding profiles to MOR may alter ß arrestin activity, which accounts for MOR desensitization and internalization.

Remifentanil but not sufentanil induces cardioprotection in human ischemic heart muscle in vitro.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies on animal models have suggested that δ-opioid receptor (OR) signaling is the primary pathway responsible for opioids' cardioprotective effect. We hypothesize that the µ-OR's activation protects the human heart muscle. METHODS: We performed the experiments on muscular trabeculae obtained from the right atrial appendages of 104 consecutive patients subjected to coronary artery bypass surgery. Two trabeculae from each patient were studied simultaneously and exposed to 60 min of hypoxia with subsequent 60 min of reoxygenation. Remifentanil (5 µM or 50 µM) or sufentanil (40 µM or 400 µM) was used from the time of reoxygenation. Trabeculae contractility was assessed as the maximal amplitude of the contraction at baseline, after 60 min of hypoxia, during reoxygenation, and after norepinephrine application. RESULTS: During reperfusion, the application of remifentanil improved cardiomyocytes' function as compared to the control group (time from reperfusion: 15 min: 39.8% vs. 21.7%, p = 0.01; 30 min: 41.4% vs. 21.8%, p = 0.01; 60 min: 42.7% vs. 26.9%, p = 0.04; after norepinephrine: 64.7% vs. 43.2%, p = 0.03). The application of sufentanil did not influence cardiomyocyte function as can be seen when comparing the results of the experimental and control group. CONCLUSIONS: Remifentanil, but not sufentanil, induces a cardioprotective effect on human right atria muscle in in vitro conditions, manifested as the increased amplitude of their contraction during reperfusion after 60 min of ischemia.

Effects of remifentanil on the noxiously stimulated somatosensory evoked potentials recorded at the spinal cord in dogs and cats.

This study assessed the somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) in dogs and cats to compare the effect of remifentanil on the action potentials evoked by peripheral noxious stimulation in the spinal cord. Five healthy dogs and five healthy cats underwent general anaesthesia induced with propofol and maintained with isoflurane. Each animals received all dosage of a constant-rate infusion of remifentanil at 0 (control), 0.25, 0.5, 1.0 or 2.0 µg/kg/min. The hair of the dorsal foot of a hind limb was clipped and an intraepidermal stimulation electrode that could selectively stimulate the nociceptive Aδ and C fibres was attached. An electrical stimulus was generated by a portable peripheral nerve testing device. The evoked potentials were recorded by two needle electrodes inserted subcutaneously in the dorsal midline between the lumbar vertebra: L3-L4 and L4-L5. Bimodal waveforms were obtained by electrical stimulation in control dogs and cats. The inhibitory effect of remifentanil was evaluated by comparing the changes in the N1P2 and P2N2 amplitudes. The N1P2 amplitude was depressed by remifentanil in a dose-dependent manner in dogs, but it showed no remifentanil-induced changes in cats. While the P2N2 amplitude was also depressed in a dose-dependent manner in dogs, it showed milder remifentanil-induced effects in cats. The N1P2 and P2N2 amplitudes observed herein are assumed to represent the evoked potentials derived from the Aδ and C fibres, respectively. Thus, the inhibitory effect of remifentanil on nociceptive transmission at the spinal cord was much weaker in cats, especially for transmissions possibly derived from Aδ fibres.

Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to scalp block in patients undergoing elective craniotomy: A prospective randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Regional techniques minimize anesthetic requirements and their effects may be beneficial. There is a lack of consensus and evidence concerning alternative analgesia strategies for cranial neurosurgery. This study was designed to evaluate the effect of scalp block with or without dexmedetomidine combined with general anesthesia on hemodynamic stability, opioid consumption and postoperative pain in patients undergoing elective craniotomy. METHODS: One hundred five patients undergoing elective craniotomy for tumor dissection were randomly divided into three groups to receive scalp block as an adjuvant to general anesthesia: with either 40 ml ropivacaine 0.5 % (Group R), 40 ml ropivacaine 0.5 % plus dexmedetomidine 1 µg/kg (Group RD) or 40 ml saline as a placebo (Group C). After a standard induction sequence using propofol, fentanyl and a single dose of rocuronium, patients were intubated. Bilateral scalp block was given immediately after induction. Anesthesia was maintained with propofol and remifentanil infusion. Five minutes before head pinning scalp block was performed by blocking the supraorbital, supratrochlear, auriculotemporal, occipital, and postauricular branches of the greater auricular nerves. All patients were monitored with electrocardiogram, invasive blood pressure, pulse oximetry and BIS monitoring. Primary outcomes measures were overall hemodynamic variables during surgery and intravenous fentanyl and remifentanil consumption. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were recorded at seven time-points: scalp block (T1-baseline), pin fixation (T2), skin incision (T3), drilling (T4), dura matter incision (T5), dura matter closure (T6) and skin closure (T7). For all time points it was recorded the mean value after 3 consecutive measures with 5 min interval. Secondary outcome was postoperative pain intensity using visual analog scale 24 and 48 h after surgery. VAS scores, fentanyl and remifentanil were evaluated using Kruskal-Wallis test. MAP and HR were compared by One-Way repeated measures Anova (GLMM) using time as random efect and by One-Way Anova using time as fxed efect. RESULTS: Mean arterial pressure was significant lower at skin closure compared to baseline in group R (p < 0,001) and in group RD (p < 0,001). Patients in group RD showed significant lower heart rate at dura matter incision, dura matter closure and skin closure compared to baseline, pin fixation and skin incision time points (p < 0,001) and reported significantly less heart rate than group C (p < 0,001) and group R (p < 0,001) during dura matter incision, dura matter closure and skin closure time points. Patients in group RD receive significant lower fentanyl than group R (p < 0,01). The intraoperative consumption of remifentanil was significant higher in control group compared to group R (p < 0,01) and to group RD (p < 0,001). Additionally, remifentanil consumption was significant lower in group RD as compared to group R (p < 0,001). Postoperative pain had no statistically differences between the three groups at 24 h and 48 h after craniotomy (Preop VAS: p = 0,915, VAS 24: p = 0,284, VAS 48, p = 0,385). No adverse effects were noted. CONCLUSION: Our study indicated that addition of dexmedetomidine to scalp block with ropivacaine 0.5% provided significantly better perioperative hemodynamic stability during elective craniotomy. Moreover, scalp block with or without dexmedetomidine reduced fentanyl and remifentanil consumption, but it didn't significantly prolonged analgesia in patients undergoing elective craniotomy.

Effect of different doses of remifentanil on the cardiovascular response after endotracheal intubation: a randomized double-blind study.

OBJECTIVE: Laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation (EI) often provoke a marked sympathetic response, which leads to tachycardia and hypertension. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of different doses of remifentanil on the cardiovascular response to laryngoscopy and EI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 100 patients were included in this randomized study. The participants were divided into four groups of 25 patients each. The patients in the control group did not receive remifentanil. The patients from other three groups received remifentanil prior to induction of anesthesia at doses of 0.5 µg/kg, 1 µg/kg, and 1.5 µg/kg. Hemodynamic parameters were measured before and after administration of remifentanil, after induction of anesthesia and one minute after EI. RESULTS: After administration of remifentanil and induction of anesthesia, a decrease in arterial pressure and heart rate occurred in most patients. After EI, an increase in arterial pressure and heart rate was observed in most patients. The largest increase was recorded in the group of patients who did not receive remifentanil. The best hemodynamic response was observed in patients who received 1 and 1.5 µg/kg of remifentanil. CONCLUSIONS: Remifentanil at the doses of 1-1.5 µg/kg is absolutely safe for co-induction of anesthesia with thiopental. Such dosing regimen provides optimal conditions for reducing hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and EI.

Hemodynamic responses to 1 MAC desflurane inhalation during anesthesia induction with propofol bolus and remifentanil continuous infusion: a prospective randomized single-blind clinical investigation.

BACKGROUND: Desflurane is not recommended during anesthesia induction because of its sympathetic stimulation effect, particularly in patients with myocardial ischemic disease. To date, the hemodynamic response to 1 MAC desflurane inhalation in combination with remifentanil infusion during anesthesia induction has rarely been reported. METHODS: This investigation was designed to compare hemodynamic responses to 1 MAC desflurane (group D, n = 200) with sevoflurane (group S, n = 200) during anesthesia induction and endotracheal intubation in adult patients undergoing elective spine surgery. Subgroup analysis of the different age subgroups was also performed. With continuous infusion of remifentanil 0.1 µg/kg/min, anesthesia was induced with propofol bolus, and endotracheal intubation was performed after muscle relaxation. Heart rate (HR) and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) were measured every minute for 5 min after anesthesia induction (T1-5) and after endotracheal intubation (T6-10). RESULTS: HR was significantly higher in group D (n = 182) than in group S (n = 173) at T3-10 except at T6 (1 min after intubation) (all P < 0.05). In the age-based subgroup analyses, which subdivided the group D and S into four subgroups based on patient's age, the changes in HR from baseline values were significantly different between the coeval subgroups of patients in their 20-29 years and 30-39 years of age (all P < 0.05). MAP was reduced from baseline value, irrespective of group and age. CONCLUSION: Inhalation of 1 MAC desflurane during anesthesia induction with propofol bolus and remifentanil continuous infusion and during endotracheal intubation was more likely to induce elevations in HR more likely than 1 MAC sevoflurane, especially in younger patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered in the Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS, http://cris.nih.go.kr ) of the Republic of Korea on Feb 12, 2016 (Registration No. KCT 0,001,813).